Merely naughty or seriously wrong? ‘Childish sexual experimentation’ and the presumption of doli incapax

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Discusses the case of R v PF [2017] EWCA Crim 983, in which the Court of Appeal reiterated that, where a defendant is prosecuted for offences arising out of conduct that took place before 30th September 1998 and the defendant was (or may have been) aged 10-13 at the time of that conduct, the prosecutor must prove that the defendant was doli capax at the relevant time. To prove that a child had the capacity to commit a criminal offence, the prosecution must adduce independent evidence that the defendant knew that his conduct was seriously wrong. R v PF was a case involving what the defendant contended was ‘childish sexual experimentation’, and this case note advocates that consideration be given to how the law regulates young people’s sexuality and sexual experimentation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)346-349
JournalThe Journal of Criminal Law
Volume81
Issue number5
Early online date11 Oct 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2017

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Merely naughty or seriously wrong? ‘Childish sexual experimentation’ and the presumption of doli incapax'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this